When I read a book called Art and Culture Politics in Postwar Taiwan, I noticed a sentence that the author, Jason Kou, quoted. It said “Art cannot be confined within frontiers—it lives only if continually subjected to foreign invasions, to migrations and transplantations. But if art’s vitality comes from the cross-bleeding of styles, its stability comes from roots that grow deep into a native soil.” Those words were used to conclude the work of the painter, Chen Chikwen.
I agreed with those words, based on my knowledge of Chen Chikwen’s life and his work. His early work was western style. Then in his middle work, he began to try more stylistic choices and try modern Chinese sensibility. His late work became deliberate and innovative. He extended the Chinese tradition to create a modern Chinese approach to painting. He, at last, made his art in the roots of Chinese.
A student in class asked the teacher a question, “Why are we talking about Chinese, Taiwanese, Italian, and French in class? In Europe, we only talk about what types of art.” Teacher answered, “Because the national identity in Europe has already set up. The question we discuss in class becomes a crucial problem in Taiwan recently.
Since our course title is “Art in Taiwan”, we have to figure out what Taiwanese art is in terms of culture and in terms of history. That’s why we keep talking about this topic.
This was my question before the student asked the teacher. After the answer was given, I understood the whole ideas the teacher wanted to gave us. Then I had more interested in this class and wanted to know more about art with culture and with history.
